Over the next few years India and China will consume considerably more barrels of oil than the US, which has been consuming vastly more barrels than them combined. China alone will consume more barrels than the US in the next couple of years and doubling that in the two following years. The fight for oil is just beginning to heat up, already exacerbating emerging conflicts on Europe's borders as Russia plays a diplomatic move to consolidate oil wealthy allies with the emerging Chinese demand for more oil. There really isn't much room for maneuvering, the stakes of war are too immense for either side. Diplomacy through international agreements that share a platform of financial and technologically mutually beneficial dependencies is the only sustainable approach we can hope for. This inevitably relies on a new form of free trade that proliferates the sharing of all advantageous advances from technology pertinent to national security and environmental sustainability. G 20 not war!

"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog"~ Sir Winston Churchill. We are nurturing a nightmare that will haunt our children, and kill theirs.

Not only do you not read the other parts of the thread you don't deal with the reality of the situation either do you? That's just great. The country's going to hell in a handbasket and you think it's funny. No wonder the conservatives are out of favor.

No I think it's funny that people think their completely bullshit mandates for detroit are even worth considering.

Oh don't be silly. Your country is getting a much-needed correction after your citizens went years buying houses they couldn't afford, gas guzzling vehicles they shouldn't have bought and indulging in household spending binges fuelled almost entirely by cheap credit.

Doing this while simultaneously fighting two wars and having added costs for post 9-11 homeland security means that the U.S. will be paying off these bills for decades.

Corrections are necessary in a market economy, and so is job loss. Throwing taxpayers' money to bail out banks, insurance companies, airlines, auto companies and others will not change anything. Most of the real money doled out will end up with banks and lawyers anyway.

The North American auto industry has been on the ropes for my entire lifetime. The only thing that has kept them alive is constant payoffs from the cities they play off each other to build subsidized plants and the grander bailouts they seek from state and federal governments when things go really bad.

Ok. With all of those people out of work what would you do? How do you think it wouild affect what is already a bad situation?

I'm betting you don't ( really ) answer this one.

I do. They have to go get a job doing something else. Because even if the economy turned on a dime and everyone started buying cars again even if we pump money into dertoit and make zero emission cars we still don't need that many people making and selling cars. Duh!

I expected the type of " Well they'll just have to get other jobs " type of answer. Ignoring the fact that this will put a strain on an already weak situation. What do you think made the last recession so bad and long lasting? Even after they declared " The recession is over! " unemployment lagged behind in many areas for a lot longer.

Now put that together with how much worse this situation is now.......

It could get really bad.

But forgive me. Maybe you guys are so isolated from this you don't have to care. The word at my work is that our jobs are secure but there will be budget cuts. But if this gets really bad I don't think you can really count on anything. For the record I hope I'm wrong about this.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

I know a lot of people that work for the auto industry. From union plant guys to software programmers in safety testing to control systems developers working on green cars to patent lawyers at suppliers to senior production managers to test engineers to sales/product engineers at small companies to ...

guess who just built and opened a new technology center outside detroit? Toyota! BTW Toyota worked very hard to make their production interchangeable. You can make a minivan on the same line as a sedan. That way they can change production in a season and respond to customer demand. They did it all without a bailout

Manufacturing has been on a decline since WWII. It's not because of NAFTA or "out souring America" or any of the other jingoistic bullshit scare (politics of fear) tactics that democrats use. It's because it doesn't take as many people as it used to make a damn car.

But I'll tell you what is the problem: The government. The US government has been brow beating the automakers into making vehicles that they can't economically make. Some of the technologies the government wanted didn't even exist yet when they were mandated by the government. Additionally, the government has allowed unfair trade practices to make overseas competition difficult. Of course, the Big Three have been further vilified as huge, soulless corporations that make obscene profits and pollute the environment. Hence, we have CAFE and MPG requirements that add costs. Now, the same people that caused the problem say they can fix it. Nice.

The Big Three certainly must take their share of the blame. Their vehicles are still not has high-quality as their Japanese counterparts, and their pricing/options/rebate structures are archaic and byzantine. But this is simply not all their fault. All in all, I think we should loan them the money they need to get through this period.

How odd...are you saying that the CAFE and MPG requirements do not apply to Volkswagon and Toyota?

The CAFE and MPG requirements are good and should be tougher if you want energy independence.

The bailout they want is just enough to keep them running to do what they do now. How much extra is it going to cost to make 100% zero emission cars in 10 years Detroit would see through this and rather go Chapter 11.

Detroit should go Chapter 11. This is their best option... they just don't realize it yet.

BTW for those that don't know washington plays politics with CAFE in a way that the big three cannot count full the MPG of cars that make overseas toward their CAFE requirements. It's a big gimme to the unions.

BTW for those that don't know washington plays politics with CAFE in a way that the big three cannot count full the MPG of cars that make overseas toward their CAFE requirements. It's a big gimme to the unions.

I can barely understand your statements above.

CAFE is for vehicles sold in the USA only, domestic and imports. The implied assumption being that these vehicles are the majority of vehicles actually driven in the USA proper.

Washington isn't playing politics with CAFE since the Bush CAFE standards were thrown out by the courts, and this is not a big gimme to the unions.

Back up your claims with a bone fide non-partisan link or two. Will you?

I don't know, but if people can only spew gossip or rumors or idle chit-chat from their friends/neighbors, it doesn't say much for having a meaningful discussion on the subject matter at hand. \

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!

Chapter 11 is a chapter of the United States Bankruptcy Code, which permits reorganization under the bankruptcy laws of the United States. Chapter 11 bankruptcy is available to any business, whether organized as a corporation or sole proprietorship, and to individuals, although it is most prominently used by corporate entities. In contrast, Chapter 7 governs the process of a liquidation bankruptcy, while Chapter 13 provides a reorganization process for the majority of private individuals with unsecured debts of less than $336,900.00 and secured debts of less than $1,010,650.00 as of April 1, 2007.

Chapter 11 is their only option if they have any desire to stay in business.

I have never heard of any large corporation desiring to stay in business, mention any form of bankruptcy other than Chapter 11.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!

If you don't understand then you need to go educate yourself. Go read up on CAFE and the two fleet rule. Then post back when you have more information.

I fully understand the current CAFE standards. Much better than you will ever be capable of understanding.

I'll assume by the "two fleet rule" that you are referring to the current seperate MPG requirements for passenger cars and light duty trucks. D'oh!

Quote:

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found these new Light Truck rules to be arbitrary and capricious; contrary to the Environmental Pollution Control Act; incorrectly set a value of zero dollars to the global warming damage caused by truck emissions; failed to set a "backstop" to prevent trucks from emitting more CO2 than in previous years; failed to set standards for vehicles in the 8,500 to 10,000 lb range; that the environmental impact assessment was inadequate, and that the rules may have had significant negative impact on the environment. The court directed NHTSA to prepare a new standard as quickly as possible and to fully evaluate that new standard's impact on the environment[2].

In addition to the new light truck rules of 2006 and the Ninth Court decision, in December 2007 Congress passed the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 which will affect CAFE standards of both cars and trucks and additionally work trucks and medium and heavy duty on-highway vehicles. This standard requires ratable increases in fuel efficiency during the model years 2011 to 2020 reaching 35 mpg in 2020 for the total fleet of passenger and non-passenger automobiles.

EDIT: Oh, you mean this;

Quote:

For the purposes of CAFE, a manufacturer's car output is divided into a domestic fleet (vehicles with more than 75 percent U.S., Canadian or post-the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Mexican content) and a foreign fleet (everything else). Each of these fleets must separately meet the requirements. The two-fleet requirement was developed by the United Automobile Workers (UAW) as a means to ensure job creation in the US. The UAW successfully lobbied Congress to write this provision into the enabling legislation. The UAW continues to advocate this position.[16]

So how does this have any effect on anything other than to level the MPG playing field for this two-tier system?

It's purpose is clear to keep auto manufacturing jobs here in the good old USA. America First!

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!

Yea I have read. And not the bullshit here. That's why is so that people think they can force detroit to fulfill their green wet dreams.

Screw the environmentalists. We're talking about energy independence. Given we cannot drill our way to energy independence like some idiots believe the only alternative is to reduce use of oil...which zero emissions (barring things like catalytic converters and other pure emission reduction technologies) typically does for you. Given that you can't GET to zero emissions without getting off gasoline that's one way to force the issue.

But it does eliminate things like biofuels which is acceptable to me but doesn't get you to zero emissions. Eh...I'm willing to trade biofuels for personal vehicles in exchange for the tree huggers to get their thrills.

Screw the environmentalists. We're talking about energy independence. Given we cannot drill our way to energy independence like some idiots believe the only alternative is to reduce use of oil...which zero emissions (barring things like catalytic converters and other pure emission reduction technologies) typically does for you. Given that you can't GET to zero emissions without getting off gasoline that's one way to force the issue.

But it does eliminate things like biofuels which is acceptable to me but doesn't get you to zero emissions. Eh...I'm willing to trade biofuels for personal vehicles in exchange for the tree huggers to get their thrills.

Even if we took away every gas-powered vehicle on the road today and replaced them with electric vehicles, there would still be tradeoffs.

First, there would be the huge increase of toxic batteries used to run the vehicles, and the problem of disposal.

I know a lot of people that work for the auto industry. From union plant guys to software programmers in safety testing to control systems developers working on green cars to patent lawyers at suppliers to senior production managers to test engineers to sales/product engineers at small companies to ...

guess who just built and opened a new technology center outside detroit? Toyota! BTW Toyota worked very hard to make their production interchangeable. You can make a minivan on the same line as a sedan. That way they can change production in a season and respond to customer demand. They did it all without a bailout

Manufacturing has been on a decline since WWII. It's not because of NAFTA or "out souring America" or any of the other jingoistic bullshit scare (politics of fear) tactics that democrats use. It's because it doesn't take as many people as it used to make a damn car.

Quote:

I know a lot of people that work for the auto industry.

Ok. Ask them how they feel about this?

Ok you said they should just get other jobs. Given that unemployment is already up and hiring is down across the board which jobs were you referring to?

I was talking to a friend at work who's husband is an Econ Professor ( also where I work ). He says this situation is like walking on ice and every time you step it cracks. You really don't know if ( or when ) you'll fall through. The way I see it this downturn could resolve itself in a couple of years if we make the right decisions now. If not we could be recovering from this for 10 years or more. I don't think we've seen anything like this in our lifetimes. As my friend's husband says " Uncharted territory ". This isn't scare tactics ( besides it's the republicans who use those ) just look around. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see things aren't good.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

I fully understand the current CAFE standards. Much better than you will ever be capable of understanding.

I'll assume by the "two fleet rule" that you are referring to the current seperate MPG requirements for passenger cars and light duty trucks. D'oh!

D'oh on you. Like I said, go educate yourself. The "two fleet rule" is explained on the NHTSA web site. You'll have to read other sites to know the origin of the rule. Please stop posting until you know what you are talking about.

D'oh on you. Like I said, go educate yourself. The "two fleet rule" is explained on the NHTSA web site. You'll have to read other sites to know the origin of the rule. Please stop posting until you know what you are talking about.

Stop posting yourself, if you are going to selectively ignore portions of someone's post.

Stop posting yourself, if you are going to spread misinformation about the CAFE standards.

Stop posting yourself, if you are going to misrepresent the UAW and their position on the CAFE standards.

Stop posting yourself, if you want me to stop being smug when replying to one of your many, many, all too many, SOP misrepresentations here in PO.

It was the big three who invested millions to defeat California's cafe standarts as well as lobbied against fuel efficiency and made shure the Hummer was regarded as "light truck" so even lawyers could right it off. Maybe and just maybe the money would have been better spent to built a product line that could withstand an economic downturn. Bush screamed:"fuel efficiency will kill the US auto industry" Rush Limbough:"Americans don't want small cars"
Brilliant.

This is what happens if people are in charge who's IQ combined is less than the IQ of the average house plant.
I do not want to own an American car manufacturer. Thanks but no thanks.

Perhaps the only thing left that will save GM is the factory and parts suppliers workers getting militant, properly organized and taking things into their own hands, for example, what happened in Argentina in the 1990s in the "fabricas recuperadas" or recovered factory movement. Whether it could ever be successful or not in this country will probably remain an unknown; the current workers' fear of possible violent reactions by law enforcement to something like a "factory occupation", our paranoia of non-traditional "heterarchical" methods in business (such as worker controlled cooperatives etc), future likely unwillingness to trade with such organizations, etc., and the fact that the automakers do not have some charismatic union leader (on a par with Lech Walesa of Gdansk), someone who is prepared to really stick his neck on the line, against extraordinary odds.

We bail out GM, Ford and Chrysler, keep things as they are, and expect a different result? Sounds like the classic definition of insanity.

We the public deserve an honest complete review of the facts with scientific interpretation and implications as to what really happened on 9/11. Bill Binney, Former senior technical director, NSA.

Are there any seeds of truth to this rambling rant/screed/manifesto? I think not.

Domestic hybrids? What market share do these currently have? I'd be highly surprised if it was even 1% of overall hybrid sales. And what kind of hybrids do the big three offer? Expensive SUV's and upscale autos. And they can't even break 30 MPG.

I see you will take every opportunity to demonstrate your ridiculous arrogance. In this case you're dead wrong: The Ford Escape is 3% of the market all by itself. Add to that the Mercury Mariner, Chevy Mailbu Hybrid and the SUV hybrids you love to despise, and you've got to be near 5%, AT LEAST. But hey, what's being 500% off between friends?

Oh, and those terrible, expensive luxury SUV hybrids you love to rip on are massive trucks that get 21-25 MPG instead of 10. I guess doubling gas mileage is no big deal.

Quote:

Blame the goobermint? How exactly is the goobermint at fault? Some bone fide non-partisan links are required to flush out this all too apparent bogus canard.

Are you actually saying that the government has not made the automakers' jobs difficult? Are you kidding? Here's a hint: Requiring 6 different regional gas blends. Here's another: California emissions standards.

Quote:

When did the new CAFE standards become law? 2007, 2008, or 2009? And they're phased in to boot. The first light duty truck CAFE standards were thrown out of court, because of the bogus auto industry's faux footprint CAFE standard. That original auto industry sponsored CAFE standard was so bogus that it was shot down in less than a year.

About all Detroit is good for is innovating XpenZive gaZ guZZlerZ! These three are about 0.56% innovation and 99.44% high margin sales. They all should be retooled to manufacturing mopeds.

I won't disagree they relied on high margin SUVs while gas was cheap and money was flowing like water. I mentioned this is one of my earlier posts. That said, you obviously know nothing about the technological development that say, GM engages in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by e1618978

Honda, Toyta, GM, Chrysler and Ford all operate under the same set of rules - how come Toyota and Honda don't suck like GM, Chrysler and Ford? And how do you propose fixing the two main problems - labor costs 65% higher in the big three than at Toyota, and GM having 5 times as many dealerships as Toyota.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinea

How odd...are you saying that the CAFE and MPG requirements do not apply to Volkswagon and Toyota?

The CAFE and MPG requirements are good and should be tougher if you want energy independence.

I'll be happy to answer those points. First, we can't ignore the mistakes that the Big Three have made. I am not saying they haven't screwed up royally in some areas (notably, overall quality, pricing structure, reliance on cheap gas). That said, Toyota, Honda etcetera have not been playing on a level field. They've had access to a market with demand for autos and money to spend on them. They don't face stiff tariffs like the American companies do in Japan and elsewhere. They get incentives to bring jobs to the US by opening plants, further aiding their bottom lines. The foreign companies also don't have to deal with the crazy labor costs the Big Three do (something that needs to change).

So no, it's just about CAFE and MPG requirements. It's those changes coupled both with other disadvantages I've listed and the mistakes the industry has made.

I can only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow doesn't look good either.

Well there has been talk of Union warrants on GM stock as a result of bankruptcy process. I'd prefer legal means rather than illegal means.

I'd prefer we find a way out of this economic crisis. Letting them go under will mean it will go on for a long time and be a lot worse. It's been said that if they do go bankrupt we wouldn't even feel the full effect for 24 months. That's the manufactures, sales people, office workers, suppliers, everyone connected to this. Also can you imagine what parts for any american car will cost? They have to be bailed out but conditionally. Otherwise I'm afraid we'll get a taste of what my parents and grandparents went through in the 1930's.

I don't think even you want that.

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination

I see you will take every opportunity to demonstrate your ridiculous arrogance. In this case you're dead wrong: The Ford Escape is 3% of the market all by itself. Add to that the Mercury Mariner, Chevy Mailbu Hybrid and the SUV hybrids you love to despise, and you've got to be near 5%, AT LEAST. But hey, what's being 500% off between friends?

Oh, and those terrible, expensive luxury SUV hybrids you love to rip on are massive trucks that get 21-25 MPG instead of 10. I guess doubling gas mileage is no big deal.

Are you actually saying that the government has not made the automakers' jobs difficult? Are you kidding? Here's a hint: Requiring 6 different regional gas blends. Here's another: California emissions standards.

I won't disagree they relied on high margin SUVs while gas was cheap and money was flowing like water. I mentioned this in one of my earlier posts. That said, you obviously know nothing about the technological development that say, GM engages in.

I'll be happy to answer those points. First, we can't ignore the mistakes that the Big Three have made. I am not saying they haven't screwed up royally in some areas (notably, overall quality, pricing structure, reliance on cheap gas). That said, Toyota, Honda etcetera have not been playing on a level field. They've had access to a market with demand for autos and money to spend on them. They don't face stiff tariffs like the American companies do in Japan and elsewhere. They get incentives to bring jobs to the US by opening plants, further aiding their bottom lines. The foreign companies also don't have to deal with the crazy labor costs the Big Three do (something that needs to change).

So no, it's just about CAFE and MPG requirements. It's those changes coupled both with other disadvantages I've listed and the mistakes the industry has made.

You know what? The rightwingextremenutjobs on these boards should just STOP making up stuff.

The link you posted is from April 25, 2005! It also does not state what percentage of sales were from the Ford Escape.

Can't even bother to read an outdated link that does not contain the data you claim?

Is this your idea of a joke? Or are you a ...

No SUV has doubled it's MPG, that I can be certain of. Maybe it's from 14-17 MPG to 19-22 MPG.

The EPA states that the Prius gets ~46 MPG, while a conventional small four cylinder gets ~35 MPG, or an increase of just over 30%.

The remainder of your post is totally incoherent and nonsensical to boot. \

EDIT: I stand corrected, the Ford Escape makes up about ~10% of all domestic hybrids sold currently, the rest of the Big 3 are a virtual drop in the proverbial hybrid bucket.

Total global hybrid sales for 2008* to date? Slightly less than 371,000. Total US domestic vehicles sold for 2008* to date? Slightly more than 11,600,000.

*Through October 2008.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!

I looked at a 2009 GMC Yukon 1500 4WD. The hybrid gets 20 MPG city and only 10 MPG conventional. I'm no mathematics professor and I may just be a "rightwingextremenutjobs on these board ... making up stuff" but lemme see 20 divided by 10 ... carry the 2 and and the remainder is zero and POOF that's DOUBLE!

What's really funny is that the E86 version gets 5 MPG less on the highway than the gas or hybrid.

I looked at a 2009 GMC Yukon 1500 4WD. The hybrid gets 20 MPG city and only 10 MPG conventional. I'm no mathematics professor and I may just be a "rightwingextremenutjobs on these board ... making up stuff" but lemme see 20 divided by 10 ... carry the 2 and and the remainder is zero and POOF that's DOUBLE!

What's really funny is that the E86 version gets 5 MPG less on the highway than the gas or hybrid.

Not sure if you are a hybrid driver but:
While city mpg is greatly improved highway mpg is only marginally better, especially for a big engine car. So the overall calculation will have to be made with the overall mpg improvement. You take the Yukon h on the freeway and it will do not much better than the non h version.
What your calcualtion clearly shows is how much gas these monsters burn just by idling at the red light.

I looked at a 2009 GMC Yukon 1500 4WD. The hybrid gets 20 MPG city and only 10 MPG conventional. I'm no mathematics professor and I may just be a "rightwingextremenutjobs on these board ... making up stuff" but lemme see 20 divided by 10 ... carry the 2 and and the remainder is zero and POOF that's DOUBLE!
What's really funny is that the E86 version gets 5 MPG less on the highway than the gas or hybrid.

Carry the 2? You need to take a remedial arithmetic course. There is no remainder in the dividend, and there are no further non-zero digits to be carried over to begin with anyway.

Comparing the combined MPG EPA estimates for similar models (HP, torque, curb weight, payload) the numbers are always 30% to 40% better for the hybrid version versus the gasoline only version. This ratio can approach 100% for purely city driving and can approach 0% for purely highway driving.

The 30-40% improvement is what most people in the real world will experience from switching over to a hybrid with similar specifications to a conventional ICE vehicle.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!

Comparing the combined MPG EPA estimates for similar models (HP, torque, curb weight, payload) the numbers are always 30% to 40% better for the hybrid version versus the gasoline only version. This ratio can approach 100% for purely city driving and can approach 0% for purely highway driving.

The 30-40% improvement is what most people in the real world will experience from switching over to a hybrid with similar specifications to a conventional ICE vehicle.

The old EPA numbers for hybrids were too high, based on unnatural advantages that hybrids get during the testing process. The toyota prius dropped from 55mpg on the old system to 46 mpg combined on the new system - and even that is too high.

The old EPA numbers for hybrids were too high, based on unnatural advantages that hybrids get during the testing process. The toyota prius dropped from 55mpg on the old system to 46 mpg combined on the new system - and even that is too high.

Understood.

I used the 46 MPG value in an earlier post.

The EPA numbers are still too high? Highway or city or both? Link? Are their numbers unfairly biased when comparing hybrids versus conventional gasoline engine vehicles? Or are both biased equally in the same direction?

These are the only consistent MPG numbers that I know of, they use a consistent test methodology for all vehicles.

Perhaps their assumed highway versus city MPG tests don't accurately reflect the average user's driving pattern or ratio of city versus highway driving?

The highway MPG numbers should be the most consistent IMHO, I know they are for my vehicle anyway, as these should be based on smooth traffic flow versus continuous stop and go traffic where the level of traffic conjestion would be a significantly larger unknown variable.

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!

Most people that I know get mid-30s with their Priuses. The people who get higher than that are the ones that modify their driving styles to see how high they can get the number. You can easily beat a Prius with a deisel jetta.

I looked at a 2009 GMC Yukon 1500 4WD. The hybrid gets 20 MPG city and only 10 MPG conventional. I'm no mathematics professor and I may just be a "rightwingextremenutjobs on these board ... making up stuff" but lemme see 20 divided by 10 ... carry the 2 and and the remainder is zero and POOF that's DOUBLE!

What's really funny is that the E86 version gets 5 MPG less on the highway than the gas or hybrid.

Hey Floorjack! What jobs were you referring to?

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination